Flock boss admits surveillance firm took too long to act over police abuse

Flock, the American surveillance company, is implementing new protective measures to prevent law enforcement from misusing its technology, a step its founder and chief executive, Garrett Langley, acknowledges should have been taken sooner.

Police have utilized Flock's systems to track romantic partners and stalk individuals, leading to increased public criticism of the company. The technology has also been instrumental in locating stolen vehicles and missing persons.

When questioned about the delay in safeguarding the tens of thousands of Flock cameras, license plate readers, and drones from police abuse, Langley responded, "Yeah... yes."

Flock is reducing the data retention period for most information from 30 days to seven, and unusual searches and uses will now be automatically flagged.

Instances of police using Flock cameras include tracking current and former romantic partners, and in one specific case, a woman who had undergone an abortion.

Across the United States, police officers have either resigned or been terminated due to the misuse of this technology.

An Indiana man recently informed local news outlets that a public records request revealed police had set a Flock alert for his vehicle, despite him not being suspected of any wrongdoing.

This year, at least 50 cities have terminated their contracts with Flock due to public outcry.

However, Langley informed the BBC that 16 cities that had previously discontinued Flock services have rejoined the company in the past three months. He noted that the company generally experiences a 7:1 ratio of new customers to lost customers.

Flock Safety has observed an increase in law enforcement personnel misusing its technology.

Langley recounted that just six months prior, during a board meeting, he inquired about the growing public scrutiny directed at Flock.

This period coincided with Amazon's Ring, a doorbell camera company, canceling a partnership with Flock following controversy over a Super Bowl advertisement that raised concerns about unwanted surveillance.

Langley stated, "Historically, my point of view as a chief executive of a private company was, I don't know if I should be making these decisions. I don't know if it's my job to say how long data should be retained."

He added that he has since come to agree with organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which advocate for police to require an active case number to access Flock's data.

"They're right. I think it should be required," he affirmed.

He further explained, "Our employees and communities have said loud and clear, they expect companies like Flock to have a stronger point of view as the expert. I resisted that because I didn't want to have that responsibility."

Langley has now embraced this responsibility. While strengthening Flock's safeguards, he is also promoting his company's products as vital tools for combating crime and enhancing policing in the US.

He asserted that cities not utilizing Flock are effectively choosing "to be less safe."

Nevertheless, he does not deny that Flock has been misused by members of law enforcement.

"We're only as good as the data coming in," Langley remarked. "When you see these cases of wrongful arrest, the data was bad and the officer failed to follow the rules. But it's easier to pick a villain that's a company like us."

Langley noted that with clearly visible cameras in cities and neighborhoods, the public increasingly views the firm as an outlet for their growing concerns about privacy and technology.

"Because you can see our cameras, it's easier to get mad," Langley said.

In the US, there is no comprehensive legislation protecting or governing the collection, use, or sale of individuals' personal data.

Langley recalled a recent encounter in Cleveland with a woman who was vehemently opposed to Flock in her community. When he inquired about her strong dislike for the technology, she explained that it was ultimately a tool for police to "abuse their power."

It turned out that police "kind of feel the same way" as her, Langley observed.

Conversations with police officers often led to them remarking about colleagues, 'we knew that person was not good. We had no way to prove it.'

This insight led to the development of Flock's new audit feature, which was initially released as an option earlier this year.

This feature automatically generates an audit log of searches conducted on Flock and flags unusual search behavior.

Most police customers activated the feature when it became available. The prevalence of misuse was so significant that Langley decided Flock needed to make the audit feature standard.

Officers who abuse their authority are "horrible," Langley stated, adding that they should face more severe consequences than just dismissal.

"If anyone is going to be the one that spearheads getting rid of abusive cops? Sign me up," Langley declared. "We trust these individuals with deadly weapons.

"I think a camera is very far from a deadly weapon, but I would say it's a very powerful tool. We should hold it incredibly accountable."